TNAG-2654-FCO40-3847-Extradition-cases-from-the-UK-and-France-to-Hong-Kong-Lorrai-1992 — Page 109

significant that s. 11(1)

commences by stating that where a

person is committed the court shall

shall inform him in ordinary

language of his right to make an application for habeas corpus

while s. 13 (which is not directly relevant here since it refers

to return to foreign states) expressly refers to applications for

judicial review. It is also significant, in my judgment, that

while under s. 11(3) and 12(2) the court and the Home Secretary

are required to have regard to the same considerations the

Secretary of State is also given a broad "general discretion" as

to the making of an order for return. It seems unlikely that

the court would be required to reconsider the same issues

considered by the Secretary of State after he has done so when

the Secretary of State clearly has a wider discretion to refuse

to make an order for return than the court has to discharge the

person who has been committed by the Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate.

Then it is to be noted that s. 13 specially provides that

if there is an application for judicial review by a person who

31